Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: What films/shows/books do you break from typical conventional wisdom and love or hate?

  1. #11
    Thought of another: I love the Ewoks. Now, if I hadn't seen ROTJ at the age of 11 when it came out in the simpler times of 1983, I'd probably understand the dislike/hate by mostly contemporary critics. But I love all their visual variations, and I even have the 2 film DVD of their post-ROTJ adventures.
    Please read my version of the Star Wars prequels and let me know what you think!

    Check out the Rebelscum Custom Dioramas Index!

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbarada View Post
    Agreed. I've listened to their music and I wouldn't consider anything they've done as great. Heck, I still listen to The Monkees to this day. I haven't voluntarily listened to a Beatles song in nearly two decades.

    A couple more, now that I've had time to think about the question:

    Batman is the most overrated superhero ever created. Especially, when he's written as a super-genius, martial arts expert, who has a contingency plan for EVERY possible scenario, no matter how remote or implausible. This is why I consider the Adam West Batman to be my favorite version of the character. Because the 60s TV series took the ludicrousness of the character and played it up for comedy.
    Oh good one!
    I forgot about Batman. I totally agree.
    I like my Super Heroes, well, SUPER.

    Batman is just a rich spoiled brat with a bunch of expensive toys.
    Toys he doesn't even create, he pays someone else to come up with the ideas and build them.

    I hate Batman.

    And I always thought Heath Ledger's performance of Joker wasn't great either.
    The only reason he got so much praise for it was because he died before the movie came out.

  3. #13
    Iron Man > Batman. (they have the same super-power).
    "Is there anyone on this ship, who even remotely, looks like Satan?" -- James Kirk, U.S.S. Enterprise.

  4. #14
    I have a lot of opinions about the Hulk, so here goes:

    Because of the 2003 and 2008 films, a lot of people seem to think that Hulk is incapable of carrying his own movie and should be relegated to supporting character status, like he has been in the Avengers movies so far. However, I disagree. I think a standalone Hulk movie could work because it has never actually been tried. The two previous films weren't Hulk films, they were Bruce Banner films and they both had the exact same plot: Bruce Banner tries not to turn into the Hulk, then he gets into a situation that requires him to turn into the Hulk.

    Nobody wants to pay $15 for a movie ticket to watch Bruce Banner get all angsty about how the Hulk is ruining his love life. So make the movie about the Hulk from beginning to end. Bruce Banner doesn't need anything more than a glorified cameo. If Mark Ruffalo wants more screen time because he's a big movie star, then replace him with a different actor. Edward Norton was a better Bruce Banner anyway, especially if we are talking about staying true to the comic book version of the character.

    So far, the best onscreen version of the Hulk came out of Thor: Ragnarok, so Taika Waititi should definitely direct the standalone Hulk movie because he's the only director who seems to understand the character so far.

    Also, the idea that the Hulk and Bruce Banner need to share the same face is something that was invented for the movies. That idea doesn't exist in the original comic stories. Nobody got confused in decades of Silver and Bronze Age comics, nobody got confused during the TV show when they had to cast two different actors for Banner and the Hulk, so audiences aren't going to get confused if they keep the same CG model for Hulk and simply recast Banner.
    Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split. - Robert E. Howard

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by BoneFett View Post
    And I always thought Heath Ledger's performance of Joker wasn't great either.
    +1 on that. I preferred Jared Leto, and Caesar Romero.

    I enjoyed the LOTR movies. However, I've never made it through any of the books, including "The Hobbit." I tried a few times over the years. I think I got through about twenty pages once. I can't tell you what it is that turned me off, but I never could get into them.

    Lost. I hated it. I tried to watch it several times because of friends and coworkers who couldn't stop talking about it. I just didn't enjoy it. Same with X-Files.

    Will Ferrell, Robin Williams and Jim Carrey. With very few exceptions, I can't stand anything these three have ever done. Actors playing the same obnoxious idiot in everything they ever do don't appeal to me.

  6. #16
    First, a general thought: I usually break from the norm these days, by finding some merit in just about any film produced; I don't know if it's the social media world we live in, but seems like everybody fancies themselves a professional critic lately. I subscribe to the idea that if hundreds to thousands of people are involved in a film production, and that there is a team who has poured their love and hard work into a script, then it can't be terrible. There are degrees of quality, and there are things I like or dislike, but I don't think it's fair to call something bad because I don't like it. For example, I have no interest in contemporary teen comedies, but I recognize that they can be good, or well made despite that.

    Now, for something specific: I loved Dark PhoeniX but apparently most people didn't! I hate to think Michael Fassbender or James McAvoy feel that the world hates their latest movie
    Please read my version of the Star Wars prequels and let me know what you think!

    Check out the Rebelscum Custom Dioramas Index!

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbarada View Post
    I have a lot of opinions about the Hulk, so here goes:

    Because of the 2003 and 2008 films, a lot of people seem to think that Hulk is incapable of carrying his own movie and should be relegated to supporting character status, like he has been in the Avengers movies so far. However, I disagree. I think a standalone Hulk movie could work because it has never actually been tried. The two previous films weren't Hulk films, they were Bruce Banner films and they both had the exact same plot: Bruce Banner tries not to turn into the Hulk, then he gets into a situation that requires him to turn into the Hulk.

    Nobody wants to pay $15 for a movie ticket to watch Bruce Banner get all angsty about how the Hulk is ruining his love life. So make the movie about the Hulk from beginning to end. Bruce Banner doesn't need anything more than a glorified cameo. If Mark Ruffalo wants more screen time because he's a big movie star, then replace him with a different actor. Edward Norton was a better Bruce Banner anyway, especially if we are talking about staying true to the comic book version of the character.

    So far, the best onscreen version of the Hulk came out of Thor: Ragnarok, so Taika Waititi should definitely direct the standalone Hulk movie because he's the only director who seems to understand the character so far.

    Also, the idea that the Hulk and Bruce Banner need to share the same face is something that was invented for the movies. That idea doesn't exist in the original comic stories. Nobody got confused in decades of Silver and Bronze Age comics, nobody got confused during the TV show when they had to cast two different actors for Banner and the Hulk, so audiences aren't going to get confused if they keep the same CG model for Hulk and simply recast Banner.
    I think the BEST stand alone Hulk film could be constructed from the Mr.Fix It run. all Hulk all clobber.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbarada View Post
    I have a lot of opinions about the Hulk, so here goes:

    Because of the 2003 and 2008 films, a lot of people seem to think that Hulk is incapable of carrying his own movie and should be relegated to supporting character status, like he has been in the Avengers movies so far. However, I disagree. I think a standalone Hulk movie could work because it has never actually been tried. The two previous films weren't Hulk films, they were Bruce Banner films and they both had the exact same plot: Bruce Banner tries not to turn into the Hulk, then he gets into a situation that requires him to turn into the Hulk.

    Nobody wants to pay $15 for a movie ticket to watch Bruce Banner get all angsty about how the Hulk is ruining his love life. So make the movie about the Hulk from beginning to end. Bruce Banner doesn't need anything more than a glorified cameo. If Mark Ruffalo wants more screen time because he's a big movie star, then replace him with a different actor. Edward Norton was a better Bruce Banner anyway, especially if we are talking about staying true to the comic book version of the character.

    So far, the best onscreen version of the Hulk came out of Thor: Ragnarok, so Taika Waititi should definitely direct the standalone Hulk movie because he's the only director who seems to understand the character so far.

    Also, the idea that the Hulk and Bruce Banner need to share the same face is something that was invented for the movies. That idea doesn't exist in the original comic stories. Nobody got confused in decades of Silver and Bronze Age comics, nobody got confused during the TV show when they had to cast two different actors for Banner and the Hulk, so audiences aren't going to get confused if they keep the same CG model for Hulk and simply recast Banner.
    Universal still holds the distribution rights to the Hulk. So even if Disney were to make a solo Hulk movie, Universal would distribute it and get a chunk of the profits. Disney can put Hulk in as many movies as they want but the minute they make a Hulk movie, Universal gets involved. That's why it hasn't happened since 2008. It's not because people think Hulk can't carry a movie on his own.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Lobotscomb View Post
    I think the BEST stand alone Hulk film could be constructed from the Mr.Fix It run. all Hulk all clobber.
    I think Ragnarok Hulk was almost perfect and easily the best onscreen realization of the character, so far. Maybe just a little bit smarter and he'd be on the same intelligence level as the Silver Age Hulk. Grey Hulk only lasted for one issue in the 60s. However, a Hulk who could speak, read, formulate plans, maintain a secret identity (while still in Hulk form), outsmart alien invaders, and had full grasp of personal pronouns, lasted for much longer during that era.

    Quote Originally Posted by lister View Post
    Universal still holds the distribution rights to the Hulk. So even if Disney were to make a solo Hulk movie, Universal would distribute it and get a chunk of the profits. Disney can put Hulk in as many movies as they want but the minute they make a Hulk movie, Universal gets involved. That's why it hasn't happened since 2008. It's not because people think Hulk can't carry a movie on his own.
    I'm fully aware of the situation with Universal. However, it's weird that Disney doesn't seem to have a problem sharing profits with Sony for the Tom Holland Spider-Man movies. So, why would the Hulk be different? Unless they think that he isn't capable of carrying his own movie.

    Another movie opinion of mine that strays from the norm: I actually liked Independence Day: Resurgence (for the most part) and was excited to see the direction the story was going at the end of the film. It's just too bad that series is likely dead in the water right now.
    Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split. - Robert E. Howard

  10. #20
    I will def. agree that Ragnarok Hulk is the best on screen Hulk. I'm not so sure I want a solo hulk though, but I think I can be convinced. I can dig the Joe Fixit idea.
    'But I don’t want to go among mad people,’ Alice remarked. ‘Oh, you can’t help that,’ said the Cat: ‘We’re all mad here. I’m mad, you’re mad.’ ‘How do you know I’m mad?’ said Alice. ‘You must be,’ said the Cat, ‘or you wouldn’t have come here.’ - Lewis Carroll 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland'

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •